Juan argued that bluegrass is the best food for cattle in the Midwest. Sammy objected by citing how the authorities at the U. S. Department of Agriculture recommended alfalfa over bluegrass for Midwestern cattle. If Juan counters this objection by arguing that the U. S. Department of Agriculture is a bloated bureaucracy with too much fat that deserves to be cut in the next federal budget bill, then Juan has

committed the fallacy of avoiding the issue.

Explanation:

The fallacy of avoiding the issue is also called the fallacy of irelevant conclusion or a red herring.

It occurs when an individual avoids dealing with an issue that he has a problem with.

In the given scenario the issue is whether bluegrass is better than Alfa Alfa for cattle in the Midwest.

Instead of Juan to address the issue he is arguing that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is a bloated bureaucracy with too much fat that deserves to be cut in the next federal budget bill.

He is not addressing the main issue

answer; be sure that the information on file is correct;

answer trochanter; i believe this is correct, plz check first, good luck;